tv [untitled] February 27, 2012 12:30pm-1:00pm PST
empower and asian-americans across the country. we are here to support the ethics commission proposal because it insures there will remain a level playing field in san francisco for candidates are from new and emerging communities. that is where the heart of our concern is. we strongly support ranked choice of voting. we want to make sure elections work smoothly and we should not have perverse incentives that forsake tended to stay in an election when they do not want to. we should not have a situation where the election laws are in danger of getting struck down by the supreme court, albeit for reasons we may not agree with. we are strongly in support of the ethics commission proposals and look forward to working with you. supervisor kim: thank you very
much. >> i would like to think the ethics commission for bringing this proposal forward. they did a nice job of incorporating public input and i think they listened to those of us to have been around this issue for a number of years. i was one of the original drafters of the program passed in 2000, so i would like to think you for taking to heart keeping the intent of this program. a supervisor kim for your leadership and supervisor campos as well. i support both proposals, but i hope we can do this at the board of supervisors. the fact this is coming from the ethics commission, is a non- partisan body with no vested interest in the outcome and i think the board should think about that and defer to their judgment on these matters.
you might have some differences, but it is a good proposal they have sent to you. the budget analyst has determined there is no additional cost as a result of this proposal. there is no fiscal note at all. in -- it is important for the members of the public to know what they've lost from a terrible supreme court ruling. candidates could receive more money if they can't approach the spending cap. but as a result, publicly financed candidates would not be able to receive more money. the solution to increase the spending caps by small amount is the smart way to go. and there -- dealing with the zombie can't it problem is a big one. we talked about should we allow
candidates to withdraw all and not have to pay the money back. [tone] we did not find a lot of support for that proposal. this political consultant talking to people just to get money. the way this is crafted, it is the smart way to go and i urge your support. supervisor kim: is there any public comment at this time? seeing now and, -- seeing none public comment is closed. i want to know if there was a violation of single subject matter and if that's initially to be concerned with. i believe we have already discussed this, but if you talk about that, that would be great. >> there is no single subject problem with either proposal. supervisor kim: could you talk
about why that is? >> it does amended to separate code sections -- the municipal elections code and the government conduct code. but it does so for a single purpose, to address what many people have referred to as a zombie candidate. it is all for the same purpose. >supervisor kim: thank you. i was wondering if there were any questions. i know it's not as simple as moving up a filing date, but this impacts deadlines such as signature gathering. i know we do not have the department of elections here to respond to the questions, but i believe this means all the deadlines to get moved up and i'm not sure if you can speak to that. i do want to acknowledge mabel
and her work on these items as well. i believe candidates can still qualify much earlier than the first day for disbursement of public funds. i know it is an immense amount of work to take in all the paperwork to qualify candidates. my understanding is candidates can pre qualify. >> but they cannot receive disbursement until later. >> hopefully candidates will work in advance to help get those qualifications met. do you have any understanding of how this might impact the time line for the department of election -- i know you can submit signatures in lieu of a
fee. you probably do not have familiarity with that. >> i don't want to give you incorrect information. >> i apologize we did not ask anyone from the department of elections to speak on that but it is my understanding the deadline will be moved up in conjunction with a new filing deadlines. we were careful to ensure the filing deadlines were after the primary election so people would know what the results were. if they were running for state assembly and did not win, they would still have a chance to file for another seat. supervisor farrell: just a few questions and may be more to my colleagues -- the effective date taking place this year, is there
a reason why -- is to make sure there is no perception we're trying to benefit ourselves -- supervisor kim: the impetus was the supreme court ruling. we wanted to be timely in complying with that and did not want an opportunity to get sued next year. the trigger would still be intact if we do not pass this ordinance or move the initiative to the voters in june. this was to prevent the current program to continue on its current form. the public financing program must change. the one difference in terms of the filing deadline will impact this year's candidates. i've spoken to candidates who are running this year and they had questions about what would change for them. i do understand your concerns,
but for me personally, it was a timeliness issue. supervisor farrell: there was reference made to a budget and analyst report about no cost. supervisor kim: there was a budget and legislative analyst's report. i don't know if we have copies on file, but i will ask for copies of that report. it did state there was no fiscal impact. >>supervisor farrell: this sayse don't know -- >> we just wanted to note that the budgeting is
based on the $2.75 per head that the city is required to appropriate. the expenditure for any one election could go up or down but the budget requirement does not. that is about 1.8 million. >> your letter refers to the budget appropriation we currently have as opposed to by increasing the cap, that we expect to see more or less spent in future elections. >> we did try to model that a little bit and i think it's accurate to say most of these provisions would tend to bring down the spending on any one election, but the appropriation requirement does not change. >> i think a lot of the changes
are great and long overdue. we pushed for the supreme court thing last year. the total spending cap we are raising seems a very high. that is the thing that still bothers me, the total spending amount we are talking about here. everything else is great. thank you for your hard work. i think it is overdue. if you want to pass that out today, it -- if you really want a recommendation -- and not saying i don't get there, but today i would probably vote against it. supervisor campos: i do think that it is helpful to hear from the department of elections in terms of what the applications are for them.
i think there were some good points raised and for our own benefit and for the benefit of the public, hearing directly from them, in terms of moving up deadlines, that will be useful. in terms of the effective date, item number two, that would have a different effective date. i think we can have that conversation with respect to item number one and hopefully we can find a place that eight of us can live with. to the extent there are those concerns, i think we should continue having that discussion that and i am glad the city attorney responded to the issue. i think that was a good question.
my hope is that both items move forward without a recommendation so that they go forward to the board and i think the fact we are where we are shows a great deal of progress and i want to thank the ethics commission for their work in getting us here. i know that is largely because of the work they have done. so thank you to the members of the commission and i think between now and that time this gets to the full board, we will have more information, but i would move that we move the two items forward without a recommendation. supervisor kim: we have a motion
to move for both items. i just want to say thank you to our community advocates and to our ethics commissioners, for spending many, many months on this. i think the process was really good and we are able to come up with a comprehensive program that addresses voter concerns around our public financing program and i think that strengthens the support for the program that we have and i know -- i am going to withdraw the motion -- we are withdrawing the motion to move forward. we do have an amendment that will be read into the record. >> thank you. on the subject of other election deadlines, given the representatives of the department of elections is not here, the nomination deadline is only one of the relevant
deadlines. there will be a need for further legislation to modify the other deadlines as well if this does become law. on the very minor amendment i would like to offer, on item number one, page two, line 5, there is an extra if. it currently reads if, it should read -- is a very small typo, but it would be best to address it. supervisor kim: i appreciate that you notice that. we have a motion to move for both items with our recommendation. we will set up a meeting with
the department of election prior to tuesday to get a sense of what that lines may have to be moved. i hope we can get input from your office. >> we are sending this to the committee? my -- i would move this forward and do so as a committee report. supervisor kim: and we do that without opposition. thank you to all members of the public to came out to speak on this. we appreciate your time and value your input and advocacy. at this time, we are recessing into closed session to hear for items. prior to that, we will open up to public comment if anyone would like to speak on these items. seeing none, public comments is closed.
>> thank you. we are reconvening the rules committee after we have gone into closed session on items 3, 4, 5, and 6. >> we met in closed session to discuss pending litigation involving the city. the committee will move three and four forward. >> we have the motion to do so. >> [inaudible] >> we have a motion not to disclose the discussion in the closed session. >> thank you. do we need to entertain the separately? we have those three motions before us and we can do that without any opposition. the meeting is adjourned.
bed, the owner of the building, as well as david from jll to talk of the significance of this to the city. >> thank you, good morning. welcome to the super bowl of innovation. while we did not enjoy the other super bowl, we have been working on hours. i have always referred to san francisco -- and we continue to do this -- as the innovation capital of the world. riverbed's decision to sign a 10-year lease and to work with the city to renovate a building here in south market, to make sure they are staying and growing here is a reflection of not only their interest in making sure they continue to find talent that exists in the city, but that the city, working with our state interests as well as our i.t. companies, continue
to do everything we can to make sure they feel comfortable and are creating jobs. every time you hear about a major company like river bed making a decision like this that is very significant, this is their headquarters, but it is their global headquarters. to suggest a 10-year lease is important. they have over 500 people working today. this additional new space than they have signed a 10-year lease for has 160,000 square feet that will allow riverbed to grow and potentially add over 650 additional jobs on top of their 500. i.t. work is growing in the city. certainly, we want it to grow. we have a lot of i.t. solutions
to be had. riverbed's technology is important, allows technologies to have i.t. management's -- companies to have a i.t. management from the date of filing to storage, all those wonderful things that technology people will have a much better way to explain and i do. i do suggest to you that this is, yet again, another example of how we are working with ceo's to make sure that we sit down and talk. it was literally last fall that we sat down. we knew they were looking, they knew they were growing. it was not going to be in some other place that we would lose them to. we had some great partners. we just came together very well
and focused on what we could do to make sure they stayed here. they know there is talent here. that is not a question. but are there other things that stabilized their ideas come interest to work here long term, and growing here, as we have had that philosophy. we want i.t. companies to stay here and grow. as a result, we are evolving our policies on a weekly basis to continue attracting companies like riverbed, making sure they feel comfortable. the end result is more people get employed. you will see numbers continue to go down in our unemployment rate. it is at 7.6%, but i am guessing that it will go down further, hopefully, with all the companies that are still talking to us about what we can do to help them. as we do, they are hiring left and right. it is exciting for me to join today with jerry, let him
explain what it is they do, in a very detailed way. again, it is the team, what the city does to make sure we stay as the innovation capital of the world. thank you very much for allowing me to announce this. we will have a chance to visit their bed soon. i think, -- river bed soon. i think, once they get their release started, they will move in in 2014, and then that goes until 2024. i hope to see them continue to grow. we will be down there cheering them on, understanding more about the involvement of their products. >> riverbed started in 2002 and it is exceedingly gratifying from where i stand to see a company of its size and stature in the technology world, make a decision to remain in san
francisco and to grow its global headquarters here. with that, i want to introduce the ceo of your bed. >> thank you. it is exciting for us -- we just announced this internally to our employees on friday. we sent around a photograph of the new building. when you work in technology in the bay area, you realize every day it is a war for talent. we are fighting to get the best and brightest. it is all about and look for property, and that comes from the minds of the people we attract. we found san francisco is a key location for attracting that power. my business partner and i started the company 10 years ago. we will be passing 1700 employees worldwide, over 500 in the city. that number will grow and grow. starting on our second decade in the city and hopefully for a long time to come.
we are a little unusual for technology companies in the city. many of them are web-based companies. we are a deep, in the strongest drink network technology company. we make heavy-duty equipment for the largest government and corporate networks. we are more like cisco foor othr companies like that. i had to have some discussions with my early investors while i was not in silicon valley. i am glad we had that conversation, made the investment. we had a good run here. we just finished a quarter of $200 million, $800 million run rate. we hope to pass $1 billion soon and we soldier forward as we move into our new headquarters in downtown san francisco. >> we would not be here celebrating a police
announcement without a building. i encourage you all to look at what 680 folsom street looks at today, juxtaposing it with these renderings. it is not only good for the economy, but for the urban landscape. i want to thank michael for his work to date for helping to transform this location. >> this is about the 20th project we have done in san francisco. it is visually challenged in its current state, but we think we have put together a great design. our partners and others have hired the best architects with som -- one of the best, sorry. we are pleased with the design. both jerry and his company had decided to go here, but it was also the mayor and city office hoping to keep technology companies here. it is a joint effort. after you take up the skin of
the building, it has amazing attribute that you have read about in our press release. 35,000 feet square plates. floor to floor slabs in the city, which is unusual. that tenants in this building will have some amazing space, some amazing views, and our r ehab will be as good as anyone. we are happy to be involved with the city. thank you very much. >> it really did take a team of folks to bring this deal together. we had great assistance from david from lasalle in helping to close this deal for the city and riverbed. >> good morning, everyone. it was a real honor to represent their best technology in this transaction, a 14-month process. i want to thank and congratulate
jerry and his real estate team for the pro-active way they have managed their headquarters, getting a head start. mike and his solid team of putting this building together. mayor lee and jennifer for the continued great work they are doing in helping us represent some of the leading technology companies, here in san francisco. it is a real pleasure to be here. thank you very much. >> we are going to break and then the mayor will take questions. not at the podium.